Kiran Nahar - Farhat Malik-Masud

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

Kiran Nahar (First Respondent) acquired the firm Norman Saville & Co and ran a high-volume online conveyancing and immigration practice controlled by non-solicitor third parties (WS, MC) and dependent on the introducer J, into which up to ~40% of fee income was paid. Client monies received via websites as purported 'agreed fees' were improperly paid into office account, breaching SAR Rules 15, 19 and 32, with a potential client account shortage of £175,920.42. The Tribunal found her in breach of numerous conduct rules, that she compromised her integrity and independence, failed to manage/supervise, entered non-compliant introducer agreements, acted recklessly, failed to cooperate, and made a dishonest false statement to the SRA about the funding of the practice (satisfying the Twinsectra objective and subjective tests). She was struck off. The Second Respondent, a part-time salaried partner deemed minimally culpable and largely a victim, admitted several allegations (no dishonesty alleged/found) and was reprimanded. Costs were summarily assessed at £80,000 (£70,000 against the First and £10,000 against the Second Respondent), not to be enforced without leave.

Duties found breached:

• No improper communication with the court
• No taking unfair advantage
• Not mislead third parties or opponents
• No conflict between current clients
• No improper use of client money
• Prompt accounting and return of money
• Accounting records, reconciliation and reports
• Firm governance, systems and compliance

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonesty in giving false information to the regulator about funding, maintained over several weeks
• Persisting with the business model after the SRA had begun investigating
• Client funds consistently placed at risk (potential shortage of £175,920.42 on client account)
• Allowing non-solicitor third parties (WS, MC, J) de facto control of the practice, syphoning c.40% of fee income

Mitigating factors:

• Inexperienced solicitor (qualified 2006), out of her depth and vulnerable to manipulation by third parties
• Not regarded as a generally dishonest person
• Good testimonials; acted as a mentor
• Suffered personally and financially, made bankrupt, virtually unemployable
• For Second Respondent: minimal culpability, salaried part-time partner (part of 17 days), made admissions, cooperated, put no money in and no financial benefit, made bankrupt